Endovascular vs Surgical Arteriovenous Fistula Outcomes

Arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are the preferred type of vascular access for dialysis, but many of them fail to mature. Despite concerted efforts to improve surgical AVF outcomes during the past 20 years, many new AVFs fail to mature, even after interventions to salvage them (assisted maturation). Postoperative ultrasounds of immature AVFs frequently demonstrate decreased flow with narrowing at the anastomosis . Surgically created AVFs typically have a 90o angle at the anastomosis, yet computational fluid dynamics suggest that an anastomotic angle <30o improves the flow hemodynamics. Therefore, there has been great interest in novel AVF technologies to limit vascular injury and improve flow dynamics and maturation rates. The new technology evaluated herein (endovascular AVF (endo-AVF) has the potential to achieve these goals and reduce the cost of vascular access care.

Endo-AVF, a novel per-cutaneous technique of AVF creation, was approved by the FDA in 2018, and has been used in U.S. hemodialysis patients . In contrast to the surgical technique (the current standard), this non-surgical approach (1) minimizes vascular injury at the time of AVF creation and (2) creates a channel between the artery and vein with an angle approaching 0o. These two features provide a scientific rationale for superior maturation compared with that of surgical AVF Investigators will perform a single-center, prospective pilot randomized clinical trial. Investigators will recruit 80 patients who have advanced chronic kidney disease or on hemodialysis with a catheter ,who there pre- operative Ultrasound showed they are eligible to surgical or endo-vascular AVF. Participants will be randomized to one of two groups: an surgical AVF intervention group that will undergo a routine surgical fistula creation, or an endo-vascular AVF intervention group will undergo per-cutaneous fistula creation . Participants will be followed for 2 years.